linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/15] NFSd state containerization

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20121121204408.GA23097@fieldses.org>
Date:	Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:44:08 -0500
From:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
Cc:	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org,
	Trond.Myklebust@...app.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/15] NFSd state containerization

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 01:34:08PM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:00:36 -0500
> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 06:20:59PM +0300, Stanislav Kinsbursky wrote:
> > > This patch set is my first attempt to containerize NFSv4 state - i.e. make it
> > > works in networks namespace context.
> > > I admit, that some of this new code could be partially rewritten during future
> > > NFSd containerization.
> > > But the overall idea look more or less correct to me.
> > > So, the main things here are:
> > > 1) making nfs4_client network namespace aware.
> > > 2) Allocating all hashes (except file_hashtbl and reclaim_str_hashtbl) per
> > > network namespace context on NFSd start (not init) and destroying on NFSd
> > > state shutdown.
> > > 3) Allocating of reclaim_str_hashtbl on legacy tracker start and destroying on
> > > legacy tracker stop.
> > > 4) Moving of client_lru and close_lru lists to per-net data.
> > > 5) Making lundromat network namespace aware.
> > 
> > These look OK and pass my tests.  Jeff, do the revised recovery bits
> > look OK?
> > 
> > Have you done any testing?
> > 
> > It'd be interesting, for example, to know if there are any pynfs that
> > fail against the server in a non-init network namespace, but pass
> > normally.
> > 
> > --b.
> > 
> 
> I looked over the patches and they look sane to me. I move that they go
> into your -next branch to soak for a bit.

Stanislav, actually, I'm unclear, since you labeled these "RFC": do you
consider these patches ready?

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/